Posted on 03/18/2024 3:25:19 PM PDT by CFW
The Supreme Court on Monday indefinitely extended its block on a Texas law that would give police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of illegally entering the U.S. while the legal battle it sparked over immigration authority plays out
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday indefinitely extended its block on a Texas law that would give police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of illegally entering the U.S. while the legal battle it sparked over immigration authority plays out.
The one-page order signed by Justice Samuel Alito did not set a deadline, instead extending the stay “pending further order.”
Opponents have called the law, known as Senate Bill 4, the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since an Arizona law more than a decade ago, portions of which were struck down by the Supreme Court.
The Texas Attorney General has said the state’s law mirrored federal law and “was adopted to address the ongoing crisis at the southern border, which hurts Texans more than anyone else.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Madison makes it pretty clear in #43 that the intent of A4S4 was mutual aid between the states to repel invasion and quell rebellion.
The sovereign states delegated limited powers to the federal government, retaining the rest for themselves and the people. Their sovereignty was one of the things retained, which is defined and bounded by their borders. Their borders are their own to protect.
I'd welcome any rebuttal arguments.
-PJ
Dear Texas,
Do it anyway.
EXACTLY.
One side ignores the law. The other side doesn’t. Cant have a country when that is occurring. Time to give the courts the middle finger. Sorry/Not Sorry.
Well, Schumer did threaten them.
Novel is okay. Most all starts out as novel at some point.
Will do some more reading.
That's what Madison writes in Federalist #43. The federal government coordinates, but the states themselves do the heavy lifting.
If you read my longer post in the link I provided, this was pre-17th amendment thinking, where the states were expected to communicate via their Senators ("on Application of the Legislature" who appointed their Senators) to the President. I argue that executing the guarantees in Article IV Section 4 was a case of the states telling the President what they were going to do, not the states asking the President for permission to do what they wanted to do. That's the very definition of sovereignty.
The limited federal government of 1787 was built to manage interstate affairs via an executive office, with a Supreme Court that had original jurisdiction when a state was involved and a Congress that can create lower court jurisdictions as the need arose.
Otherwise, the states were expected to do the rest, including securing their own borders from invasion, both from other states and from foreign nations.
-PJ
Agreed. The natural law is superior to the twisted mess of positive laws that we have now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.